Prologue
(Admittedly, the intent of this prologue is to psyche you up for what follows.)

Just this morning, Friday, on Good Morning America, there was a segment about a nobody-of-a-college-student by the name of Brad, who wanted his 15 minutes of fame, so he created an illusion of being a celebrity wearing dark glasses with an entourage of bodyguards, cameramen, and news reporters following him from Rockefeller Center to Times Square in Manhattan, and onlookers crowded around him, and when some onlookers were interviewed, they swore they saw this guy Brad in movies like "Spiderman," and when one onlooker was asked about Brad's music, the guy said that he heard Brad's first single. Other onlookers got their pictures taken with Brad. It was a big ta'do. Supposedly, a viral video of all this was made, presumably on Youtube, but you can probably see a clip of this on GMA's website. CONCLUSION: it's easy to create an illusory hoax.

In a response to someone who wrote that "hundreds of witnesses have stated they've seen a plane hit the [WTC] towers," I wrote the following:

I think that a consultation with an illusionist like David Copperfield or David Blaine on the subject of the power of suggestion is in order.

Here's a possible explanation for what may have happened… perhaps a highly possible one.

"Hundreds of witnesses" may have boiled down to just a half-dozen shills who, as instructed, at the right moment, dialed 911 and screamed "A plane, a plane hit the World Trade Center!" Then these shills would turn to fellow pedestrians at street level and ask repeatedly in an agitated manner: "Did you see it? Did you see it? It flew right overhead! The plane! The plane! The plane that flew into the North Tower?" until the people around the shills started to think that they had actually seen it happen.

The shills' calls to the 911 dispatch center got relayed to first responders many times over with the news media picking it up, and people on the street got the news over their smart phones, and they too started to believe the shills' story especially since they got it from the familiar face of a prominent newscaster.

With lots of firefighters and EMTs moving among the crowds and talking about planes, these crowds overhearing this soon started to believe that they, too, saw planes. After all, it was coming from the mouths of officials, right?

But the really big thing is that THE NEWS MEDIA SKEWED SO-CALLED "EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS" TO THOSE THAT CONFORMED TO THE OFFICIAL STORY, WHILE NOT AIRING MUCH ABOUT DISSENTING ACCOUNTS OF OTHERS. Repetition, repetition and repetition sealed it into the psyche of Americans, and, so, it seemed that there were hundreds of witnesses to planes when, in fact, there were as little as six shills and only six shills… and no planes at all.

So where does one recruit such shills? Well, it should be easy. All that you need do is to approach someone who is facing sentencing in a criminal drug case, and tell the prospect that all of his troubles can "go away" in exchange for just one little favor, that little favor as noted above.

Then you follow up all of this with propaganda on later news reports to further hammer away and seal things into the psyche of the American public, so much so that people who were on the West Coast, some 3,000 miles from the World Trade Center start to believe that they, too, were eyewitnesses on the street on 9/11.

David Copperfield made the Statue of Liberty disappear, you know.

[The discussion continued with the first of two follow-up replies, starting here…]

You know, those five dancing videographing Israelis across the Hudson River who were gleefully recording the smoking towers of the WTC before they became demolecularized…?

If they did not have a direct role in demolishing the office complex, maybe the following describes the role that they did actually play.

Earlier on the day of 9/11/2001, maybe they had their little van parked on Church Street near Vesey Street, or thereabouts, where, on cue, just two-and-one-half seconds before a big KABOOM some 90 stories high up in the WTC North Tower, they hit the play button on their ghetto blaster, and, as loud as loud could be, the sound of a jet aircraft was emitted from their loud speakers: VROOOOMMM!

Then, before the streets were closed to traffic, they scurried over east to Broadway to go south a few blocks, and then back west to Church Street, where again, on cue, two-and-one-half seconds before a big KABOOM high up in the South Tower, they played the very same VROOOOMMM recording.

Immediately after those VROOOOMMM recordings having been played, shills on the street asked feverishly: "Did you see it? Did you see it? The plane that hit the WTC! It flew right over us."

Now, I suggest that you ask an illusionist: just how many people at street level having heard the VROOOOMMM recording plus the sound of KABOOM above plus [false] assertions from shills would sincerely believe that they had seen aircraft when, in actuality, there were none?

You know, I suppose that there are well-skilled illusionists all over Russia, just like there are bunko artists and three-card Monte dealers here.

After the dancing Israelis did their dirty work in Manhattan, they quickly split the scene, and scrambled to a New Jersey vantage point where they got to witness the handy work in which they lent a hand to happen… hypothetically speaking, of course.

Footnote: There are numerous conflicting reports regarding these Israelis. Supposedly they were at their NJ vantage point before the towers were struck… or were they?

[The first follow-up reply ends here, and the second one begins.]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but as I remember things, early reports of 9/11 downplayed the issue of aircraft noise moments before [alleged] impacts upon the North and South Towers of the WTC, and soon thereafter, NOTHING about it.

Few "witnesses" stated that they had heard such noise; few others stated that they heard no such noise, again, as I remember things.

If ghetto blaster speakers were used to emit simulated aircraft noise, say on Church Street at a strategic spot, then, of course, throngs of people in the vicinity of those speakers would hear the recording. However, throngs of people several blocks to the west on West Street, especially those around corners, would not hear it loud enough to even realize its existence.

Think about it. Real aircraft, at top speed, approaching the WTC would be heard for great distances to the east AND to the west of Church Street, probably all the way to Brooklyn and across the Hudson River to New Jersey. Well, did we hear of any statements to corroborate such nature of such flights?

Now, I ask those in the reading audience who are well versed in aviation science: wouldn't a 757 or 767 flying at top speed make much more noise traveling through the denser air of a very low altitude as opposed to travelling in the thin air of a normal high cruising altitude?

Now, think, think, think back to 9/11. Shortly after the towers collapsed, Ghouliani appeared on the dusty, paper strewn street of lower Manhattan, and when he was approached by a reporter asking, "What do we know at this time?" Ghouliani made a point to say "WE KNOW THAT TWO PLANES STRUCK THE WTC." My, my, what an assertive, affirmative, declarative sentence. He, as a lawyer, did not include a word like "allegedly." He did not use a word like "reportedly," nor "suspected." He made no mention of promising an investigation. No! Ghouliani just chose to seal things into the minds of the public with his official endorsement… his celebrity endorsement… you know, just like Oprah exploited her "Oprah Effect" when having bogus 9/11 guests on her show.

"Hundreds of witnesses" may have boiled down to just a half-dozen shills who, as instructed, at the right moment, dialed 911 and screamed "A plane, a plane hit the World Trade Center!" Then these shills would turn to fellow pedestrians at street level and ask repeatedly in an agitated manner: "Did you see it? Did you see it? It flew right overhead! The plane! The plane! The plane that flew into the North Tower?" until the people around the shills started to think that they had actually seen it happen.

A few thoughts on the matter:

1.) Among legal circles, eyewitness testimony in court is reputed to be the least reliable form of evidence.

2.) A few months after 9/11, Michael Bloomberg and Rudy Giuliani were at one of Bloomberg's inaugural celebrations. They embraced tightly, and when they broke the embrace, Giuliani said to Bloomberg: "We did it! We did it!" You know what I think? REPHASE: You know what I don't think? I don't think that Giuliani was referring to Bloomberg's mayoral election win.

3.) Most of you may be aware of the shooting incident Friday morning at the Fifth Avenue entrance to the Empire State Building. Later, from a helicopter, the news camera zoomed in on all the small, numbered yellow signs that were all over the street, more than two dozen of them. These signs served as evidence markers. The commentary was that the N.Y.P.D. has some of the finest crime scene investigators in the world, but did we see anything like this on 9/11 by the N.Y.P.D., or was all that really happened simply Giuliani's order for a quickie clean-up so that lower Manhattan could get back to normal ASAP? Why was there no real investigation of 9/11 by the Manhattan D.A.'s office, by the Port Authority Police, by American Airlines, by United Airlines, by several insurance companies, and by others?

4.) 9/11 seemed like such a ridiculously implausible caper of a conspiracy, yet it was executed in spite of great risk of failure (at minimum, failure to fool). Why would anyone in his right mind take on such an absolutely UNTHINKABLE project? Well, maybe there was something at play here that more than colored a person's judgment beyond the boundaries of a "right mind;" something that vastly enhanced and incited a person's risk-taking nature; something that greatly bolstered a person's confidence that he could do it all and have it all; something had the potential to turn him totally amoral. That something may very well have been methamphetamine, and the reputed nature of methamphetamine is what inspired my composing the essay at https://www.stormfront.org/forum/t855346/ in this forum.

Someone responded to me in another forum. This guy doubts the "no plane" theory of the WTC strikes, and he supports his position by pointing out that hundreds of witnesses saw planes strike the WTC towers.

My response was that hundreds of "witnesses" may just boil down to a half a dozen shills planted on the streets of lower Manhattan on 9/11.

At elapsed time 3:12 into the video, the commentator says: "Right from the start, on the street itself, the official story was born."

Apparently, the producer of the video, to some degree or another, agrees with me. The official story was planted by shills on the street from the very start.

Then at elapsed time 3:16 into the video we have a Joe D. Plumber type piping up with his "expert" attestation and opinion: "From out of nowhere engines SCREAMED right into the side of the twin tower exploding through the other side, and then I witnessed both towers collapse, one first and then the second mostly due to structural failure because the fire was just too intense."

Huh? Structural failure? The fire was just too intense? How can a man on the street come to those very early conclusions when experts later easily debunked such nonsense as was the case later in the cited video.

THIS GUY, NO DOUBT, WAS A SHILL! A shill with a prepared script!

Moving on… The fireballs as seen in 9/11 WTC videos… were they figments of the….?

Were they figments of the use of fractals out of which special effects software was developed to create just what we saw as "fireballs" in 9/11 WTC videos?

I have absolutely no recollection of any eye witnesses on the street ever saying that they saw the huge fireballs that ensued from the alleged impacts of planes on the twin towers.

There was a clearly bogus 9/11 guest on the Oprah Show who claimed to have been horribly burned from a fireball that shot out of an elevator shaft, crossed the lobby and hit her as she entered the tower. Supposedly, this was due to flaming jet fuel that went down elevator shaft(s) from the 90th floor above.

Then, right on 9/11, there was a news story about a woman on the street at a bus stop who was severely burned by flaming jet fuel that fell from above. She supposedly was taken to a hospital and was later reported to have died.

At the time of the tenth anniversary, the New York Daily News had a rundown of the fatalities of 9/11. This report included six people on the street who died from WTC dust on 9/11, but there was no mention about the woman at the bus stop.

All this adds up to a conclusion in my mind. There never was any exploding/flaming jet fuel at the twin towers on 9/11. THE FURTHER CONCLUSION IS THAT PLANES NEVER STRUCK THE TWIN TOWERS. It was all an illusory hoax. As implausibly as this seems, it worked at fooling a gullible world.